1995 Ch. Canuet – this second wine of Cantenac Brown is not often a good value, but this one was at least decent. wood (cedar) and fruit (and later some violet) in the nose, fruit just OK, drying at the end. Would have been better about 8 years ago.

1996 Pequera – the first stage of an interesting experiment that I’ll explain fully later. Sweet briary nose with some blackberry and tobacco, well developed wine, tasty with a medium long sweet finish with good acidity. About what I’d expect – I am slowly working my way through a case of this wine.

1996 Penfolds St. Henri Shiraz – mint was the give away in the dark sweet ripe nose, and the minute you tasted this significantly sweet wine you knew for sure where it originated. Fortunately it became a bit less sweet in the finish, and avoided being cloying. Not my style of Aussie wine.

1994 Lindemans Pyrus – this was my bottle and I put it up right after the other Aussie to see what they would make of it. Deep sweet fruit nose, smooth entry into a much better balanced wine, not too sweet, with a lengthy finish. In great shape and it had them guessing Bordeaux, though the contrast between it and then previous wine certainly made the Pyrus seem more clatter-like.

1986 Pavillon Rouge – must have been our day for second wines. This Margaux has never impressed me, while the white version has been quite good at times. Nothing wrong with the nose – copybook claret all the way. Good colour, smooth on palate with adequate fruit – probably the best Pavillon rouge I’ve tasted. The only second wine of a first growth I’d buy is still Les Forts de Latour, though.

1997 Beaulieu Vineyards Tapestry – ripe caramel and red fruit nose, mint and cherries, smooth and medium long. Decent wine, but less claret like than the Pyrus! I love the George de Latour cabs, but have never been especially impressed with this wine, pleasant though it usually is.

1996 Pesquera – yes, they had opened a magnum, decanted half and then put the balance in a normal size corked bottle, and it was a totally different wine. This one showed a slightly metallic nose, was lighter weight in the mouth, and had a medium length finish with enhanced tannins. First half of the bottle had 4 hours air; second half had maybe 30 minutes.

1994 Lindemans Pyrus – this was my bottle and I put it up right after the other Aussie to see what they would make of it. Deep sweet fruit nose, smooth entry into a much better balanced wine, not too sweet, with a lengthy finish. In great shape and it had them guessing Bordeaux, though the contrast between it and then previous wine certainly made the Pyrus seem more clatter-like.

I've had a number of bottles of the 1994 Pyrus. A representative note from 8/19/2008: "Young in color and still quite unevolved. Plum and other black fruits, unobtrusive oak. Acid level fine (was a little screechy 2/08). One would not mistake this for Bordeaux, despite the blend, but this is a wine of substance with a long way to go."

I found this to be one of those wines enjoyed by a range of people, including those who would find classic Bordeaux too tannic and not fruity enough.I have one bottle left but don't doubt that it will please.

Sorry about the 1970 Ormes de Pez.Back in the day that was my go-to wine for something a little special, at $2.99/bottle. But those are long gone (the days and the wine).